White House Seeks to Expand DNA DATABASE...

USA Today ^ | 4/15/2003 | Richard Willing

[kesg]

"including criminals."

Suspects aren't necessarily criminals.

Two points. First, I don't accept the notion that building a DNA database implies that people who give DNA samples are suspects. Second, such a database can aid law enforcement in exonerating people, as well as identifying victims of crimes.

The bottom line for me is that the government can do a better job of securing our rights and freedoms with a DNA database than without one.

[Protagoras]

How often do you get arrested?

Moronic predictable attack.

I am concerned with the difference between suspects and convicts.

You are concerned with worshipping authority, particularly if it is Republican authority.

[RightWhale]

The film Gattaca wasn't just sci-fi. It's well on its way. If you like what you saw in Gattaca, don't do anything like take an interest in the progress of genetic and cloning law in Congress or in other countries. Invest in transgenic chickens, DNA archives, and therapeutic cloning.

-Uma

[Poohbah]

I am concerned with the difference between suspects and convicts.

Generally, the people I've met in real life who are that worried about it are either criminal defense attorneys (the only kind of defense attorney there is :o) or those who are frequent members of the former category, desperately trying to avoid becoming the latter.

It also explains some of the reflexive cop-hatred here on FR...

[kaylar]

There have been several articles posted to FR on Joyce Gilchrist, a crime lab tech who may be to blame for the execution of an innocent man. Here's some nonFR reports, hopefully someone with the FR links will post them:

Joyce Gilchrist, Lab tech

More on Joyce Gilchrist, forensic chemist

And there's theFBI crime lab scandals. A book was written about it:

Tainting Evidence : Behind the Scandals at the FBI Crime Lab

And there've been multiple threads posted here on that , too...perhaps a freepers who saved those links will post them, too.

And there's the cases being overturned in TX right now, where planted evidence was used to convict people of drug offense...And similar cases in LA (the state) and the cases involving the LAPD....and the Witchhunts over false and coerced child abuse accusations....

None of this encourages me at least to believe a DNA database won't be misused.

[Protagoras]

First, I don't accept the notion that building a DNA database implies that people who give have DNA samples their person violated without due process are suspects.

I fixed it for you.

Second, such a database can aid law enforcement in exonerating people, as well as identifying victims of crimes.

It can aid the government in doing other things in the future when Hillary is in charge too.

am not seeing any well-reasoned argument against the use of a DNA database

The forth amendment.

I'm not against databases, it is how the samples are collected and from whom. LET THEM GET A WARRANT IF THEY WANT TO SEARCH.

[kaylar]

My husband is a probation and parole officer assigned to a facility , as well as an officer of the court. Neither he nor I have had any runins with the law AT ALL.

[Protagoras]

Good one, kind of like, "if you haven't done anything wrong you have nothing to fear".

Anyone who is concerned about rights and the constitution is a lawyer or criminal wannabe. Typical.

[BlackbirdSST]

So far this Administration and it's Justice Dept. hasn't found a freedom or privacy it wouldn't violate.

Let's face it. There is nothing these people can do to garner outrage from most here, nothing. Frankly, most day's the statist (used to be known as Conservatives) that permeate this forum make me want to puke! Now if this were billary or hill, well then the gloves would come off! Watch, in the near future, the stupid party will be out of power again and the statist will attempt to morph back into Conservatives, they'll accept none of the blame for supporting this kind of crap either. Blackbird.

[kaylar]

If the DNA database could be administered by angels or incorruptable androids, it might be a 'good thing'....and I love A & E's Cold Case Files, in which murder cases years or even decades old are solved by advances in DNA testing. But the articles I posted above are only a few of the abuses that have come to light regarding law enforcement, or the criminal justice system in general. I don't see how a DNA database would NOT be misused.

[OXENinFLA]

This movie is based on what Bush is starting today. DNA on everyone.

[Protagoras]

I don't see how a DNA database would NOT be misused.

I have no problem with record keeping, which is all a database is. But if they want my DNA, let them comply with the constitution, get a warrant.

[meadsjn]

...from adults who have been arrested but not convicted would be added to the FBI's national DNA database ...

I wonder how long it will take to arrest everyone and collect samples.

[Black Agnes]

Your DNA can be copied like a xerox machine by a process called PCR. DNA is hardly foolproof evidence anymore. Even fingerprints are harder to copy than DNA.

[Black Agnes]

DNA is *not* more reliable than a fingerprint. It's actually easy to duplicate DNA and if you like, plant it wherever you want. The 'kit', PCR, costs about $40. It copies small quantities of DNA like a xerox machine in order to get enough to sequence. It's used in biology labs all the time. This is a money making opportunity waiting to happen for some enterprising med-tech at a medical laboratory.

[kaylar]

Really....that's rather a terrifying prospect, and it makes this database even more problematical.

[webstersII]

Then why is DNA becoming the gold standard for LE to prosecute cases in court? Seems like your info would give the defense lots of grist for the mill of "reasonable doubt".

[Black Agnes]

Mainly because the majority of people on a jury are scientifically illiterate. The prosecutors know this. They get rid of any 'troublemakers' during voir dire. I've done jury duty as have my scientific colleagues. Attorneys *never* pick scientists to serve on a jury. Just tell them you're a PhD in science and they hit the eject button. Besides, we all *know* that DNA is foolproof, right?

The PCR kit isn't widely known outside of scientific circles...yet. Kind of like the little machines that make 'new' DL's. No great need for them until having a DL became proof of identity.

[APBaer]

"give the defense lots of grist for the mill of "reasonable doubt"

We know from other threads that the FBI and other law enforcement agencies have been caught from time to time faking evidence.

The problem arises when the unrelated Town of Goodness puts Police Technician Jones on the stand because you cannot impeach him with the bad acts of others.

You can't say we know that x, and we know that Y were introducing phoney evidence. Judge wouldn't allow that because it does not relate to, or show any indication that Jones would do the same.

[Black Agnes]

PCR description/technique